Trump administration budget cuts could become a major problem as coronavirus spreads (excerpt) The Trump administration recently requested $2.5 billion in emergency funds to prepare the U.S. for a possible widespread outbreak of coronavirus. Critics, though, are pointing out that money might not be necessary if the administration hadn’t spent the past two years largely dismantling government units that were designed to protect against pandemics.
The cuts started in 2018, as the White House focused on eliminating funding to Obama-era disease security programs. In March of that year, Rear Adm. Timothy Ziemer, whose job it was to lead the U.S. response in the event of a pandemic, abruptly left the administration and his global health security team was disbanded.
That same year, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) was forced to slash its efforts to prevent global disease outbreak by 80% as its funding for the program began to run out. [end excerpt]
A new national poll has meanwhile found Trump losing the presidential race to whomever the Democratic nominee proves to be by seven points... [end excerpt]
NSC spokesman Robert Palladino said Wednesday the administration “remains committed to global health, global health security and biodefense, and will continue to address these issues with the same resolve under the new structure.”
...and instead of some low-level bureaucrat, Trump has put Vice President Pence in charge (raising administration responsiveness). The guys position that the article laments "losing" would have been eliminated "regardless".
Pence's New Coronavirus Role Raises Questions About His Public Health Record. (excerpt) When President Trump announced Wednesday that Vice President Mike Pence would oversee the government effort to contain the fast-spreading coronavirus, he said the former Indiana governor "has a certain talent for this". But not everyone agrees. Pence's public health record, especially while he was governor, is now coming under harsh scrutiny. ...
During Pence's time as governor, one of Indiana's poorest counties was hit hard with an HIV outbreak. More than 200 infections were eventually attributed to the outbreak in Scott County... The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention descended on the state to investigate. The outbreak was blamed on opioid addiction and needle sharing and health experts called for a needle exchange.
But Pence was delayed in his response, saying he was morally opposed to the state providing needles to drug users — even if those needles could effectively slow the spreading of HIV. ... A study by the Yale School of Public Health found that had Indiana acted earlier the number of people affected could have been reduced by more than 90 percent. [end excerpt]
I'm sure that the former Indiana Governor and current Vice President has no moral objection to people with the flu. coughing (as opposed to giving free needles to opioid addicts).
I have a moral objection to a man who let people die due to his homophobia being in charge in another situation where lives are on the line. Dotard is even worse. He says the lives of poor people must be endangered or he won't act (wants to transfer money from heating assistance program to replace his huge CDC cuts).
...and I have a moral objection to people who kill their own babies and allow hetero-sexual people to die from entirely preventable diseases because of their homophilia.
I have a moral objection to your misogyny (which manifests as concern for imaginary babies). FYI, the preventable diseases you refer to are spread by straight people having straight sex. Persecuting gay people (to satisfy your hate) wouldn't eliminate these diseases.
Persecuting gay people (to satisfy your hate) wouldn't eliminate these diseases. No, but they would make them illegal, and thereby slow disease progression.
Encouraging the practice of safe sex slows the progression of sexually transmitted diseases, not outlawing diseases. And making it illegal to catch a disease would lead to people not getting treated, thereby SPEEDING the progression of such diseases. Not only are you a hater, you want people to DIE to satisfy your hate.
It would never be illegal to catch a disease, as there are many ways of catching one. But outlawing a wholly voluntary yet totally unnecessary act or acts (sodomy) that serves as a primary path towards catching one has been an effective public health measure for millenia.
Sex for enjoyment (most sex) is unnecessary and spreads disease. Why not outlaw ALL sex outside of hetro marriage? That would slow disease progression. Significantly, I think. But you want such anti-freedom laws applied to certain people only (people you hate). btw, using anti-sodomy laws to outlaw sex between consenting adults is unconstitutional (see Lawrence v. Texas).
You're lying. If that were a law, it would be a law that Dotard broke numerous times. Yet you have previously indicated admiration when it came to Dotard's fornicating and adultery as proof of his "alpha male" status.
Quote: Trump called himself a "brave soldier" for avoiding STDs while dating in the late 1990s. He made reference to the HIV and AIDS epidemic at the time as well, referring to women's vaginas as "potential landmines", adding: "There's some real danger there". [end quote]
Dotard was referring to sex outside of marriage. Should he have been arrested? Additionally, he has cheated on ALL of his wives. Lock him up!
In the US military, you can still get Court Martialed for "Alienation of Affection". But also don't blame me for the fact that the invention and widespread availability of birth control pills in the early sixties rendered 2,000 years of biblical hygienically based public health legislation obsolete.
Roe vs. Wade (1974) was Lott's wife turning around to get one long last look at her hometown.
Of course, to a misogynist like you, progress that benefits women is a bad thing. Your's is a backward minority opinion. Fortunately. Why are you (someone who doesn't identify as Christian) referring to the Christian Bible?
18 comments:
He did the opposite.
Trump administration budget cuts could become a major problem as coronavirus spreads (excerpt) The Trump administration recently requested $2.5 billion in emergency funds to prepare the U.S. for a possible widespread outbreak of coronavirus. Critics, though, are pointing out that money might not be necessary if the administration hadn’t spent the past two years largely dismantling government units that were designed to protect against pandemics.
The cuts started in 2018, as the White House focused on eliminating funding to Obama-era disease security programs. In March of that year, Rear Adm. Timothy Ziemer, whose job it was to lead the U.S. response in the event of a pandemic, abruptly left the administration and his global health security team was disbanded.
That same year, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) was forced to slash its efforts to prevent global disease outbreak by 80% as its funding for the program began to run out. [end excerpt]
Pathetic president condemned for seeking publicity as coronavirus crisis escalates, as 2020 poll shows him trailing several points behind generic Democrat: (excerpt) Donald Trump continues to face criticism over his handling of the coronavirus outbreak, with 2020 rivals Bernie Sanders and Joe Biden both going after him on Sunday and the former saying it was pathetic the president was "running into South Carolina trying to steal some media attention away from Democrats" in a time of international crisis.
A new national poll has meanwhile found Trump losing the presidential race to whomever the Democratic nominee proves to be by seven points... [end excerpt]
Fox Nooz = Alternate universe.
NSC spokesman Robert Palladino said Wednesday the administration “remains committed to global health, global health security and biodefense, and will continue to address these issues with the same resolve under the new structure.”
...and instead of some low-level bureaucrat, Trump has put Vice President Pence in charge (raising administration responsiveness). The guys position that the article laments "losing" would have been eliminated "regardless".
Pence's New Coronavirus Role Raises Questions About His Public Health Record. (excerpt) When President Trump announced Wednesday that Vice President Mike Pence would oversee the government effort to contain the fast-spreading coronavirus, he said the former Indiana governor "has a certain talent for this". But not everyone agrees. Pence's public health record, especially while he was governor, is now coming under harsh scrutiny. ...
During Pence's time as governor, one of Indiana's poorest counties was hit hard with an HIV outbreak. More than 200 infections were eventually attributed to the outbreak in Scott County... The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention descended on the state to investigate. The outbreak was blamed on opioid addiction and needle sharing and health experts called for a needle exchange.
But Pence was delayed in his response, saying he was morally opposed to the state providing needles to drug users — even if those needles could effectively slow the spreading of HIV. ... A study by the Yale School of Public Health found that had Indiana acted earlier the number of people affected could have been reduced by more than 90 percent. [end excerpt]
A Coronavirus PSA From Vice President Mike Pence :(
I'm sure that the former Indiana Governor and current Vice President has no moral objection to people with the flu. coughing (as opposed to giving free needles to opioid addicts).
I have a moral objection to a man who let people die due to his homophobia being in charge in another situation where lives are on the line. Dotard is even worse. He says the lives of poor people must be endangered or he won't act (wants to transfer money from heating assistance program to replace his huge CDC cuts).
Dotard + Pence = amoral predisent and VP team.
...and I have a moral objection to people who kill their own babies and allow hetero-sexual people to die from entirely preventable diseases because of their homophilia.
I have a moral objection to your misogyny (which manifests as concern for imaginary babies). FYI, the preventable diseases you refer to are spread by straight people having straight sex. Persecuting gay people (to satisfy your hate) wouldn't eliminate these diseases.
Persecuting gay people (to satisfy your hate) wouldn't eliminate these diseases. No, but they would make them illegal, and thereby slow disease progression.
Encouraging the practice of safe sex slows the progression of sexually transmitted diseases, not outlawing diseases. And making it illegal to catch a disease would lead to people not getting treated, thereby SPEEDING the progression of such diseases. Not only are you a hater, you want people to DIE to satisfy your hate.
It would never be illegal to catch a disease, as there are many ways of catching one. But outlawing a wholly voluntary yet totally unnecessary act or acts (sodomy) that serves as a primary path towards catching one has been an effective public health measure for millenia.
Sex for enjoyment (most sex) is unnecessary and spreads disease. Why not outlaw ALL sex outside of hetro marriage? That would slow disease progression. Significantly, I think. But you want such anti-freedom laws applied to certain people only (people you hate). btw, using anti-sodomy laws to outlaw sex between consenting adults is unconstitutional (see Lawrence v. Texas).
I agree, Outlaw it all. That's the way it was for 2,000+ years.
You're lying. If that were a law, it would be a law that Dotard broke numerous times. Yet you have previously indicated admiration when it came to Dotard's fornicating and adultery as proof of his "alpha male" status.
Quote: Trump called himself a "brave soldier" for avoiding STDs while dating in the late 1990s. He made reference to the HIV and AIDS epidemic at the time as well, referring to women's vaginas as "potential landmines", adding: "There's some real danger there". [end quote]
Dotard was referring to sex outside of marriage. Should he have been arrested? Additionally, he has cheated on ALL of his wives. Lock him up!
In the US military, you can still get Court Martialed for "Alienation of Affection". But also don't blame me for the fact that the invention and widespread availability of birth control pills in the early sixties rendered 2,000 years of biblical hygienically based public health legislation obsolete.
Roe vs. Wade (1974) was Lott's wife turning around to get one long last look at her hometown.
Of course, to a misogynist like you, progress that benefits women is a bad thing. Your's is a backward minority opinion. Fortunately. Why are you (someone who doesn't identify as Christian) referring to the Christian Bible?
Work benefits women? What will the hypergamists say? lol!
ps The Bible is Christian? I thought that they stole most of it from the Jews.
Post a Comment